Extreme Earnings Research Articles

Do Individual Investors Drive Post-Earnings Announcement Drift? Direct Evidence from Personal Trades

This study tests whether naive trading by individual investors, or some class of individual investors, causes post-earnings announcement drift (PEAD). Inconsistent with the individual trading hypothesis, individual investor trading fails to subsume any of the power of extreme earnings surprises to predict future abnormal returns. Moreover, individuals are significant net buyers after both negative and positive extreme earnings surprises, consistent with an attention effect, but not with their trades causing PEAD. Finally, we find no indication that trading by individuals explains the concentration of drift at subsequent earnings announcement dates.

Incentives and Penalties Related to Earnings Overstatements that Violate GAAP

This paper investigates the incentives and the penalties related to earnings overstatements primarily in firms that are subject to accounting enforcement actions by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). I find (1) that managers in treatment firms are more likely to sell their holdings and exercise stock appreciation rights in the period when earnings are overstated than are managers in control firms, and (2) that the sales occur at inflated prices. I do not find evidence that earnings overstatement in these firms is motivated by concerns about debt covenant violations or the cost of external financing. The evidence suggests that the monitoring of managers' trading behavior can be informative about the likelihood of earnings overstatement. Many economists believe that insider trading is an efficient method of compensating managers for their efforts. These economists argue that reputation losses would preclude managers from making profitable trades before periods of poor corporate performance. Consequently, this paper also investigates the employment and monetary penalties imposed on managers after the earnings overstatement is publicly discovered. This evidence reveals that (1) managers' employment losses subsequent to discovery are similar in firms that do and do not overstate earnings and (2) that the SEC is not likely to impose trading sanctions on managers in firms with earnings overstatement unless the managers sell their own shares as part of a firm security offering. The evidence suggests that neither employment or SEC-imposed monetary losses are effective in preventing the managers in these firms with extreme earnings overstatements from selling their stake in their firms in the face of declining performance.

Competitive equilibrium convergence in a posted-offer market with extreme earnings inequities

We present the results of five laboratory posted-offer experiments in which the competitive equilibrium model predicts that all exchange profits are received by one side of the market, thus defining a boundary condition. Price converges to the prediction more slowly when buyers rather than sellers receive the exchange surplus, apparently due to the increased market power of sellers in this trading mechanism. A model of the seller's decision in this market is developed to explain this result. We also observe costly signalling and tacit collusion in our experiments.

Does the Stock Market Overreact to Corporate Earnings Information?

ABSTRACTThis paper tests whether the stock market overreacts to extreme earnings, by examining firms' stock returns over the 36 months subsequent to extreme earnings years. While the poorest earners do outperform the best earners, the poorest earners are also significantly smaller than the best earners. When poor earners are matched with good earners of equal size, there is little evidence of differential performance. This suggests that size, and not investor overreaction to earnings, is responsible for the “overreaction” phenomenon, the tendency for prior period losers to outperform prior period winners in the subsequent period.